[2021] KEHC 2550 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner was not related to the deceased by blood or otherwise and was not a beneficiary of the estate. The petitioner failed to provide evidence of any trust or legitimate claim to the estate property. His defence was evasive and raised issues more appropriate for a land dispute, not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 2550 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Nicholas Odanga Maloba; Applicant: Alfred Cliwers Maloba; Respondent: Eleandro Okello Ondengah
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Busia
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 219 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant
- Outcome
- application allowed; grant revoked
- Legal Topics
- Revocation of Grant, Fraudulent Obtainment of Grant, Beneficiary Entitlement, Trust Claims, Succession Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nicholas Odanga Maloba
Applicant
Alfred Cliwers Maloba
Applicant
Eleandro Okello Ondengah
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant of letters of administration was obtained fraudulently by the petitioner who was not a beneficiary of the estate.
- 2 Whether the petitioner had any legitimate claim to the estate based on an alleged trust.
- 3 Whether the objectors are entitled to revocation of the grant and restoration of the deceased's name as owner of the estate.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner was not related to the deceased by blood or otherwise and was not a beneficiary of the estate. The petitioner failed to provide evidence of any trust or legitimate claim to the estate property. His defence was evasive and raised issues more appropriate for a land dispute, not succession proceedings. The court held that the grant was obtained fraudulently in contravention of Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. Consequently, the grant was revoked, all consequential orders and transactions set aside, and the name of the deceased restored as owner of the estate. The objectors were granted liberty to petition afresh for letters of administration intestate.
Court Disposition
application allowed; grant revoked
Orders
- The grant issued to Eleandro Okello Ondengah is revoked together with all consequential orders and transactions pertaining to the estate property.
- The name of the deceased as owner of the estate shall be restored forthwith.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUSIA
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO.219 OF 2013
NICHOLAS ODANGA MALOBA...............1ST OBJECTOR/APPLICANT
ALFRED CLIWERS MALOBA..................2ND OBJECTOR/APPLICANT
VERSUS
ELEANDRO OKELLO ONDENGAH.......PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
[1]The grant subject of this objection was issued on 20th August 2013 to Eleandro Okello Ondengah (petitioner) to administer and eventually distribute among the rightful beneficiaries the estate of the late Oloo Obwoga (deceased) comprising of land parcel Nos.Marachi Esikoma 336 and 337. The record did not show that the grant was ever confirmed for purposes of actual distribution of the estate to the beneficiaries. Nonetheless, on 2nd August 2019, the present application for revocation of the g rant was made by Nicholas Odanga Maloba and Alfred Cliwers Maloba (objectors/applicant) on the basis that the grant was fraudulently obtained by the petitioner who is said to be a stranger and a non-beneficiary of the estate.
[2]The hearing of the application proceeded by way of the affidavit evidence and written submissions. Both parties filed their respective submissions which when viewed together with both the supporting and replying affidavit indicate that the main issue for determination was whether the subject grant was obtained by the petitioner by fraud and/or false representations with regard to his relationship with the deceased. Indeed, a person who obtains a grant respecting the estate of a person to whom he is not related by blood or any other way or has no connection to the estate whatsoever would be acting fraudulently with the intention of depriving the beneficiaries of the estate their rightful inheritance.
It was herein alleged by the objectors that the petitioner, has no blood relations with the deceased nor is he a beneficiary of the deceased’s estate in any manner.
[3]In his defence, as may be deciphered from his replying affidavits, the petitioner did not dispute the aforementioned allegation relating to his connection with the deceased or his estate. He merely alleged that the estate property known as Marachi/Esikoma/337 belonged to his late father but was held in trust for him by the deceased father of the objector who owned the property known as Marachi/Esikoma/336.
The petitioner therefore contended that the objectors are only entitled to the property No.336.
The reply by the petitioner did not disprove the allegations made against him by the objectors. This therefore meant that he wrongly and fraudulently obtained the subject grant while he was not related to the deceased in any manner and was in fact a stranger to the deceased’s estate. In doing so, the petitioner actually came into conflict with the provisions if s.76 of the Law of Succession Act.He alluded to the existence of a trust between the deceased and his late father but did not lead any evidence to prove the fact and perhaps show his linkage with the estate of the deceased.
[4] The petitioner’s defence to this application was redibly disapproved by the objecors. In any event, the defence was evasive inasmuch as it was based on matters which cannot be raised in a succession dispute but a land dispute. So, if the petitioner has any genuine claim against the estate of the deceased, then he should file a proper civil case in a court with competent jurisdiction. Otherwise, this application is merited and is hereby allowed to the extent that the subject grant be and is hereby revoked together with all consequential orders and/or transaction pertaining to the estate property. The name of the deceased as the owner of the estate shall forthwith be restored and the objectors be at liberty to petition afresh for grants of letters of administration intestate respecting the estate of the deceased to be issued to them or any other rightful beneficiary of the estate in a fresh and separate succession cause.
Both parties shall bear their own costs of the application.
Ordered accordingly.
J.R KARANJAH
J U D G E
[READ & SIGNED THIS 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021]